Misinformation during Presidents' First Hundred Days: A Cost/Benefit Analysis

• In Event: Populism, Technocracy and Crises

Abstract

This paper aims at building upon two elements. Firstly, drawing on five years of comparative research on the presidential transitions of two American and three French presidents, Obama, Trump, Sarkozy, Hollande, and Macron, this paper aims to explore the challenges of mis- and disinformation in an always more scrutinized political discourse and environment. Indeed, the rise of populism brought by the election of Donald Trump shed a light on the challenges “truth” poses, both for those who made transparency a campaign issue and for those whose campaign was based on some ambiguity. The extent to which this poses leadership challenges in the context of these presidents’ takeovers is very specific to each presidency.

The presidency from an institutional point of view is a dense grid of norms and expectations that constrains the way this role is interpreted. Besides, once democracies exist, they have to be consolidated, meaning that norms such as truth, being factual, or transparency become increasingly discussed. However, being factual is a norm that, as important can it be, represents in some instances costs, more than benefits.

The presidential transition and the first hundred days are institutionally very normed. This leads us to analyze this density of norms as a challenge and a cost in itself, as the need for factual information does not match the low degree of certainty existing at this stage: nominations are still ongoing and it takes time to “learn the job”; some policy choices still have to be made; alliances are not yet fully defined. Disinformation can be a problem, but as this formative period is fluid, misinformation or a lack of information are usually also important, hence to be studied. This is essential to understand how the “window of political opportunity” aspect of this changeover leads to defining new roles, structures, and power relationships within the administration and between the administration, the legislature, and the media.

This paper is in accordance with observations from the division call 14. Impacts of dis- and misinformation upon governing institutions, public opinion, and public policies are not to be underestimated, although they can occur in surprising ways, especially in the case of Donald Trump and the rise of populism associated with his election. For instance, unlike what one might think, spreading misinformation actually made it easier for Trump in many areas to go through his first hundred days. Conversely, it made Obama’s first hundred days way harder for him and his administration, as he wanted to be nuanced, transparent, and pedagogical. The bar was raised: empirically, it translates to more staff and the need for a more thorough organization, leading to various challenges.

We will explore these impacts through three dimensions commonly used to understand how political elites take action: Policy; Office; and Votes (Müller, Strom, 1999). Studying the first hundred days through this lens allows us to then classify the challenges presidents encounter.

The “Votes” dimension forces us to focus on elements such as the way the presidential image is shaped, both for the public opinion (first speeches; ceremonies; symbols) and relative to their relationship with the media (management of controversies and criticisms, etc). Accepting a controversial image can sometimes alleviate the need to get the political capacity to assemble teams to shape the presidential image.

The “Office” aspect leads up to focus on the way presidents appoint their administrations to maximize results by limiting negative externalities. They also need to form a cabinet and assign roles and procedures or create an organizational and political culture consistent with the presidential agenda. With each key nomination being scrutinized and criticized, keeping an eye on how this information is presented to the world is essential.

The “Policy” aspect relates to several elements, such as: the position and shifts in terms of a political platform following the election; implementation of campaign promises; passing laws; and agenda organization. Here again, three aspects must be considered in this age of mis- and disinformation; on what ground are these policies taken; how are they presented to the public opinion; is this presentation consistent with what is being done.

All of these dimensions play a major role in shaping the presidential transition process and the first hundred days as a whole. Different strategies are pursued by various presidents, with different implications. If the difference between a presidential system and a semi-presidential one is important, it is far from being the only variable to consider.

Based on three types of data and the process-tracing method, this paper includes interviews with staff of presidents, media material, testimonial material, and institutional data. As a former Visiting Scholar at the Miller Center (UVA), I will also rely on their work titled the "First-Year Project" and the center’s considerable resources.

Author

• Nicolas Audignon, Université Paris-Panthéon-Assas